Top athletes are always looking for an edge over their competition. Occasionally, this drive will lead them to take extreme, dangerous or even illegal steps to gain that edge. And one of the latest trends to gain an advantage? Human breast milk.

The benefits of breastfeeding infants are well established, and breastfeeding is strongly recommended by health care professionals and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. But that’s for babies. What about breast milk for adults? And what about breast milk as a way to bulk up and gain muscle weight? Or breast milk for treating certain kinds of cancer?

Before answering any of these questions, it’s best to start by asking, is it safe for adults to consume human breast milk at all?

The Food and Drug Administration says that there are a number of risks for consuming shared breast milk. These risks include “exposure to infectious diseases, including HIV, to chemical contaminants, such as some illegal drugs, and to a limited number of prescription drugs that might be in the human milk, if the donor has not been adequately screened. In addition, if human milk is not handled and stored properly, it could, like any type of milk, become contaminated and unsafe to drink.”

Safety of  breast milk on the internet

A quick search on Facebook marketplace will show you that breast milk sharing and selling isn’t hypothetical. It’s already happening. Selling breast milk is not illegal. It is unregulated.

“When human milk is obtained directly from individuals or through the internet, the donor is unlikely to have been adequately screened for infectious disease or contamination risk,” according to the FDA. In addition, the  FDA says it is not likely that human milk has been collected, processed, tested or stored in a way that reduces possible safety risks.

In an episode of the Netflix docuseries (Un)Well, “Bulking Up with Breast Milk,” these questions about breast milk usage are raised.

Dr. Sarah Keim, Epidemiologist at Nationwide Children’s Hospital, was interviewed for the (Un)Well documentary series. She talked about a study she led that was published in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine in 2015, titled, “More than a lucrative liquid: the risks for adult consumers of human breast milk bought from the online market.”

“I don’t think there’s really any circumstance, where one could recommend breast milk sharing,” Keim said. “Unless you have a lab in your kitchen, you really can’t test the milk yourself and know that it’s completely safe.”

Keim’s warnings aren’t hyperbole. Her study tested 102 samples of breast milk from across the country and showed that breast milk bought online contained detectable bacteria in 93 percent of the samples.

“Some of the samples have such high bacterial content, it’s closer to sewer water,” she said.

The study says that “the lack of pasteurization and testing not only indicates a bacterial risk but breast milk also exposes consumers to a host of infectious diseases, including cytomegalovirus, hepatitis B and C, HIV-1/2, HTLV-I&II and syphilis.”

Keim’s study came to the conclusion that breast milk purchased online is not optimal for adult nutrition or in the treatment of disease, as there are more risks than proven benefits.

“As adult consumers are generally ineligible for milk banks, unless milk is coming from a known source – a lactating partner, for instance – it comes from an online source and therefore poses many unknown potentials for communicable disease. Buying online potentially exposes the consumer to bacteria, viruses and contaminants that render this not a ‘clean’ ‘super food’ for performance nutrition or supplementation.”

Where breast milk is needed most

However, there are safe ways to get human breast milk for babies. The FDA recommends that, if after consultation with a health care provider, people who decide to feed a baby with human milk from a source other than the baby’s mother, should only use milk from a source that has screened its milk donors and taken other precautions to ensure the safety of its milk.

“There are human milk banks that take voluntary steps to screen milk donors and safely collect, process, handle, test and store the milk. In a few states, there are required safety standards for such milk banks. FDA has not been involved in establishing these voluntary guidelines or state standards.”

Verified milk banks can be found through organizations like Human Milk Banking, Association of North America. 

There is another concern to consider when asking whether adults should consume human breast milk, is there enough? 

Human breast milk is always in demand. It can be vital for premature babies to receive milk instead of formula. Less than half of mothers with premature babies can provide the milk needed for their babies to provide nutrients, immune and growth-promoting components.

During the coronavirus pandemic, the screening of milk donors has become more rigorous. This has made keeping a sufficient supply of donor milk even more difficult. Adults using human milk potentially diminish the donor supply from milk banks and take away milk from the premature babies that need it most.

So for the athlete looking to bulk up, there’s more than just the efficacy of breast milk in relation to performance to think about. The athlete must also consider the potential health risks and the damage they may be causing by using a limited supply of breast milk.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety Website, click here)

If you want to see a lot of people become unhinged, try floating this: why not include meat alternatives such as plant-based burgers to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommended foods? Especially, since the recently released report from the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee extols the health benefits of eating a lot of vegetables and fruits.

Going one step further, why not offer these meatless burgers in school cafeterias and nursing homes? That way the children and old people could get yet another way to dine on produce.

While this line of thinking might make perfect sense to some people, especially those agreeing with the federal departments that people should limit how much meat they eat, it would, of course, cause fireworks among groups that raise livestock such as cows, pigs, chickens, and lamb. After all, in their minds — and in the minds of many consumers —meat is the backbone of a healthy diet.

This has long been a firm dietary belief in the United States. Glance through the Farm Journal’s “Famous Country Cookbook: Great Cooking for Everyday,” published in 1971, and you’ll quickly see that meat was a culinary “shining star.” In fact, the first section is titled simply “Meats.” There’s no need to adorn it with any gustatory adjectives.

Let’s read the first paragraph of that section: “Farm women carry platters to the table for just about every meal they serve. Meat takes the spotlight three times a day in their homes, for that’s country custom, and many farmers think they haven’t had a square meal without it.”

Want to kick your appetite into gear? Try the next part of that paragraph: “Breakfast brings crisp bacon ribbons, ham slices dappled with brown, (glaze) or expertly seasoned sausage cakes — and eggs. Dinner, still served at noon, as a rule, features such favorites as roasts and steaks, with satiny smooth gravy. Supper platter specials are countless — ground beef in dozens of dress-ups has its share of champions.”

And while there are chapters devoted to “Chicken and Other Poultry,” “Potatoes,” “Eggs,” “Butter and Cream,” “Milk and Cheese,” there is no chapter strictly devoted to vegetables. How about kale? Not even an afterthought. It doesn’t seem like the recipes in this book, as delicious-sounding as they may be, would serve as a benchmark for the recent dietary guidelines.

While most people don’t even know that the federal government puts out dietary guidelines every five years, they do benefit from them. This year, the advisory team of health and nutrition experts’ report is actually a review of the latest dietary and nutrition research that the USDA and Department of Health and Human Services will use to develop the 2020-25 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Updated every five years, the guidelines help determine federal nutrition policies and healthy eating recommendations for the nation.

Our eating habits change

Without a doubt, people’s eating preferences do change as time goes by. Doctors’ advice also changes.

In earlier years, for example, urban moms were perplexed about how they would go about persuading their children to drink 3 to 4 cups of milk each day, as was recommended by government nutritionists. Back then, milk wasn’t a common household drink, at least not in the cities.  Now milk is not only cow’s milk but also almond milk, oat milk, even hemp milk. In fact, these alternative milk have grabbed 14 percent of the entire milk category— to the tune of $2 billion in the 52 weeks ending Dec. 2019, according to SPINS, a food-related data technology company.

And it wasn’t that long ago that vegetarians and vegans were brushed off as people “who ate rabbit food.” But vegetarian meal options are now offered on airplanes and at conferences. That would have been unheard of 20 or so years ago. Back then, the reaction would be “Who would want to eat a meal without meat?”

The bottom line is that federal dietary guidelines help determine federal nutrition policies and form the basis for programs such as the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs. Starting over a century ago, the government has helped Americans make healthy food choices by providing a number of publications, food guidance symbols, and, more recently, a suite of interactive online tools.

Not that everyone will abide by the guidelines. After all, french fries and Dorito chips are tempting. But the hope is that people will substitute healthy foods such as vegetables, fruits, grains, nuts, and lean meats for junk food — at least for some of it. This, in turn, according to the dietary guidelines, will improve people’s health.

These sensible changes will mean healthier school lunches for our children, better nutritional advice for all, and progress in the fight against climate change,” said Erik Olson, Senior Strategic Director of the Health Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Plenty to improve

According to the recently released advisory report, the committee’s work took place against a backdrop of several significant health issues related to nutrition in the United States.

Top of the list is overweight and obesity. The report points out that more than 70 percent of Americans are overweight or obese. More alarming than that: the prevalence of severe obesity has increased over the past two decades.

And while the high rates of overweight and obesity are a public health problem in themselves, says the report, they also can lead to prevalent diet-related chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and some types of cancer.

The report says that 6 in 10 Americans have a chronic condition and 4 in 10 Americans have 2 or more chronic conditions. And while various conditions contribute to the prevalence of these chronic diseases, prominent among these are unhealthy dietary patterns and a lack of physical activity.

We’ve heard it before. We have to eat healthy foods and exercise. Some people do that — and, of course, they’re usually healthier for it. Maybe there’s something to it. Maybe we should pay more attention to what we eat. Maybe we should check out the guidelines.

Another health-related problem is that many low-income people simply don’t have access to affordable healthy food. According to the report, in 2018, more than 37 million people, including 6 million children, lived in households that were uncertain of having or unable to acquire, enough food to meet their needs.

What they found

The good news is that you’ll reduce the risks of all causes of death if you’re an adult whose diet is higher in vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, whole grains, lean meats and seafood, appropriate dairy foods and unsaturated vegetable oils while being lower in red and processed meats, saturated fatty acids and cholesterol, and beverages and foods with added sugars.

Notice that they didn’t cut out meat altogether. But when it comes to beef, it needs to be lean. And a portion should be no larger than the palm of your hand or your cellphone, advise folks at the National Cattlemen’s Beef Producers Association.

As for plant-based burgers such as the Impossible Burger and Beyond Meat burgers, Danielle Beck, a policy guru, and Shalene McNeill, one of the association’s nutritionists, warn that those types of options are processed — made with a lot of ingredients. And they contain a lot of sodium.

McNeill said that while a 4-ounce hamburger has 75 mg of sodium, the Impossible Burger and Beyond Meat burgers have anywhere from 370 to 390 mg.

According to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, diets higher in sodium are associated with an increased risk of developing high blood pressure, which is a major cause of stroke and heart disease.

When you hear “sodium,” think “salt,” a mineral composed primarily of sodium chloride. The bottom line, go easy with the saltshaker. Too much salt is bad for you.

McNeill and Beck also pointed out that American consumers are increasingly seeking out “natural” foods — that is, foods without a long list of ingredients. Meat fits right in with that.

In an earlier interview with Food Safety Website, Washington state cattleman Rick Nelson, who has a degree in animal science, said that beef is usually “nutrient-dense,” while plant-based meats can be deficient in some nutrients.

Nutrient-dense foods are foods that are naturally rich in vitamins, minerals, and other substances and that may have positive health effects. All vegetables, fruits, whole grains, fish, eggs, and nuts prepared without added solid fats or sugars are considered nutrient-dense, as are lean or low-fat forms of fluid milk, meat, and poultry prepared without added solid fats or sugars. Nutritionists say that nutrient-dense foods provide substantial amounts of vitamins and minerals (micronutrients) and relatively few calories compared to forms of the food that have solid fat and/or added sugars.

On the other side of the fence, Impossible Foods CEO Pat Brown said that the critics of plant-based meats are missing the point;

“Our product is substantially better for the consumer than what it replaces,” he told CNBC.

These new plant-based burgers and other meat options are actually directed toward meat-eaters, especially since vegetarians make up only 3 percent of the U.S. population. Many consumers say that although they eat beef, they also say they’d like to cut down on how much beef they eat.

According to a long-term study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association Internal Medicine, researchers found that swapping only 3 percent of total calories in the diet from animal to plant protein was linked to a 10 percent decrease in the risk of death.

The two most popular meatless burger alternatives are the Beyond Burger and the Impossible Burger, both of which are 100 percent plant-based and made without any animal products. The Beyond Burger’s 20 grams (g) of protein comes from peas, mung beans; its fat contents come from canola oil, coconut oil , and cocoa butter. The Impossible Burger has 19 g of protein, which it gets from soy and potato proteins and its fat from coconut oil and sunflower oil.

Plant-based meats are not a passing fad. In fact, they’re a fast-growing segment of the food market. Investment firm UBS projects that the plant-based protein and meat alternatives market will increase from $4.6 billion in 2018 to a whopping $85 billion in 2030.

As for the committee’s report, Michele Simon, executive director of the Plant-Based Foods Association said she is pleased to see the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee follow the science on recommending a mostly plant-based diet while reducing saturated fats as well as red and processed meats.

“The science on such recommendations has been clear for decades,” she said. “We hope that science will carry the day and look forward to submitting our comments and seeing the final report.”

But when asked if the dietary guidelines should include recommendations in favor of plant-based meats, Simon said the ball is in the consumer’s court.

“We are pleased that the recommendations follow the science that we should all reduce our meat intake,” she said, “however consumers choose to make that change in their diets.”

What about food safety

Food safety is part of this, especially when considering the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA), which takes a preventive approach to safeguard people’s health.

Consumers play an important role in food safety. Health and nutrition experts agree that individual behaviors, along with sound government policies and responsible private-sector practices, are needed to reduce foodborne illnesses.

As for hamburgers, they have been linked to E. coli and other food pathogen outbreaks, but that’s usually because the raw meat (if it was contaminated with E. coli or other pathogens) came into contact with things like cutting boards and other foods before being cooked. Also, some people don’t cook the burgers to an internal temperature of 160 degrees, which kills the pathogens.

But raw produce — romaine lettuce, spinach, and onions, for example — has also seen its share of outbreaks and recalls associated with foodborne pathogens.

However, because plant-based meats are cooked, they don’t present the same potential health problems as raw produce.

Even so, Jaydee Hanson, Center for Food Safety, said that when it comes to food safety, consumers should treat the plant-based burgers like meat. They should be cooked to an internal temperature of 160 degrees, and they shouldn’t be eaten raw.

Washing your hands before preparing the meatless burgers and making sure the burgers don’t get contaminated by touching meat or other possibly contaminated foods, is also important.

“Pathogens that you might pick up in a kitchen could grow and contaminate the burgers,” he said.

Weighing the risks of falling ill from eating foods contaminated with foodborne pathogens, Simon of Plant-Based Foods said that “it seems pretty obvious that the risk of outbreaks we tend to see in burgers such as E.coli and salmonella is far less with plant-based burgers.”

Read the report

USDA and the Department of Health and Human Services plan to release the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans by the end of this year. The next edition will include advice on healthy eating from people from birth into older adulthood. The whole report can be read here.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety Website, click here)

Section 12203 of the 2018 Farm Bill requires pest- and disease-planning activities that mirror the extensive planning efforts APHIS already performs. Specifically, it requires APHIS to develop a uniform list of pests and diseases that represent the gravest threat to the United States and to develop comprehensive response plans to ensure Federal and State governments are prepared to respond to them.

APHIS is publishing the list on its website.  The agency will review comments from the public about the list, including suggestions of pests or diseases that should be added or removed.  In providing comments, individuals should keep in mind that the Farm Bill definition of a pest or disease of concern limits this list to those that are “likely to pose a significant risk to the food and agricultural critical infrastructure sector” and is not meant to be an exhaustive list of all possible pests or diseases. Comments may be submitted to APHISPestDiseaseList@usda.gov.

After reviewing feedback and potentially revising the list, APHIS will ensure it has fully developed comprehensive response plans to address the pests and diseases on the list. Additionally, it will continue to work with its State partners on response plans they wish to create. The agency will also continue to periodically test those plans to ensure awareness of each organization’s roles and responsibilities.

APHIS continues to practice its thorough planning to prevent the introduction of potential pests and diseases into the United States. The presence or absence of a pest or disease on this list does not preclude APHIS from taking appropriate actions to protect plant or animal health. If a threat emerges that is not on the list, APHIS will respond appropriately, according to the agency.

APHIS promises to keep the United States free of foreign animal and plant pests and diseases, which the agency says benefits American producers and consumers by maintaining the value of U.S. agricultural and food resources and upholding and expanding export markets abroad.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety Website, click here.)

Now when I get a report on Salmonella infections in backyard flocks across 46 states or hundreds sickened by Salmonella Newport due to contaminated onions, I feel just a little bit of cheer.

Oh, it’s not that I am heartless about those suffering from Salmonella or unfeeling about just how icky almost 800 cases of cyclosporiasis can be. It’s just that at the moment, foodborne illness outbreaks and pathogens are signs that we might eventually be getting back to normal.

And that cheers me.

We’d started 2020 nicely enough with outbreaks of Listeria in 17 states for contaminated enoki mushrooms and of E. coli O103 infections in 10 states over clover sprouts.

President Trump activated the federal emergency over the COVID-19 coronavirus on Jan.31. For a while, after that, it seemed like foodborne illness dried up. Now it’s starting to feel like things might be getting back to good old normal.

We are into seven months of life being very different than it was before this emergency drill. We’ve all changed—some more than others.

As my routine involves news-gathering and writing, solo activities, I’ve been luckier than most. Still, I found myself listening to satellite radio’s Classics and Rural Radio instead of my bad old habits for talking heads on TV or radio.

There’s also more time for reading and reaching out without any noise.
Like most of us, I spend a half-hour or so each date updating myself on the various COVID-19 data sources–Worldmeter, John Hopkins, and CDC are all useful.

Is it good that we are at 5.1 million COID-19 cases when we had 60.8 million H1Ni cases during the 2009 pandemic? Or is it just bad that COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. had hit 165,000 when we got off with 12,469 during the 2009 pandemic?

Somebody this week wrote that we are closer to the end than the beginning. I think that is all a matter of one’s geographic perspective. I’ve been going back and forth between two areas with different experiences.

Weld County, CO, for example, has produced only a trickle of new COVED-19 cases this summer, and only one additional death. In the spring, it was a hotspot with more than 3600 cases and 90 deaths.

When I first arrived in Hays County, TX in the spring, fatalities since the onset was still in single digits, but grew to a total of at least 34 over the summer. Hays County did not escape the spike in cases Texas experienced over the summer, reaching 5,012 cases since the first diagnosis of the virus within the county on March 14.

There are currently 2,803 active coronavirus cases with 2,175 recoveries in Hays County, home to Texas State University in San Marcos.

Weld County is home to the University of Northern Colorado in Greeley.
Several convalescent homes and the JBS beef plant ran up the Weld County numbers in the spring. Texas put caution aside for a while, causing the spike, which came after TSU adjourned.

Living in either Greeley or San Marcos without fear is not difficult, although it can be tedious. It mainly involves staying away from other humans and masking up when some limited, short-time contact is required, like at the grocery store.

Dining is either take-out or outdoor seating, and some of the options are pretty good. Restaurants have done well with take-outs of dinner and drinks.

Traveling between the two locations is a two and one-half hour United non-stop from Austin to Denver. An MIT study out last week found there is a 1 in 4300 chance of contracting COVID-19 from a nearby passenger, or even better at 1 in 7,700 if the middle seat is vacant.

I’ve already “risked it” a couple of times, and plan to do so again in two weeks. Airports and airlines require masks, and its easy to avoid contact with people in the terminals. TSA wants to see your face but only requires removing your cover for a few seconds.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety Website, click here.)

The ready-to-eat smoked sausage items were produced on Apr. 22, 2020. The following products subject to the public health alert are:

• 14-oz. plastic packages containing 6 pieces of “BLUEGRASS METTWURST,” with a use or freeze by date of July 23, 2020.
• 14-oz. plastic packages containing 6 pieces of “WALNUT CREEK FOODS Smoked Sausage,” with a use or freeze by date of July 23, 2020.
• 14-oz. plastic packages containing 6 pieces of Lidl “SMOKED BRATWURST,” with a use or freeze by date of July 23, 2020.
• 14-oz. plastic packages containing 6 pieces of Lidl “SMOKED BRATWURST WITH CHEESE,” with a use or freeze by date of July 23, 2020.

The products bear establishment number “EST. 7417” inside the USDA mark of inspection. These items were shipped to distributors and retail locations in Kentucky, Ohio, North Carolina, and Virginia.

The problem was discovered by routine testing and the results showed one of the products was contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. The additional products may be affected by cross-contamination.

Consumption of food contaminated with L. monocytogenes can cause listeriosis, a serious infection that primarily affects older adults, persons with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women and their newborns. Less commonly, persons outside these risk groups are affected.

Listeriosis can cause fever, muscle aches, headache, stiff neck, confusion, loss of balance and convulsions sometimes preceded by diarrhea or other gastrointestinal symptoms. An invasive infection spreads beyond the gastrointestinal tract. In pregnant women, the infection can cause miscarriages, stillbirths, premature delivery or life-threatening infection of the newborn. In addition, serious and sometimes fatal infections can occur in older adults and persons with weakened immune systems. Listeriosis is treated with antibiotics. Persons in the higher-risk categories who experience flu-like symptoms within two months after eating contaminated food should seek medical care and tell the health care provider about eating the contaminated food.

FSIS is concerned that some product may be in consumers’ freezers. Consumers who have purchased these products are urged not to consume them. These products should be thrown away or returned to the place of purchase.

FSIS advises all consumers to reheat ready-to-eat products until steaming hot.

If you’re anything like me, the COVID-19 pandemic has left you with a lot of extra time around the house. For me and many others, this has meant diving into hobbies such as gardening. 

This is a new hobby for me and as everything is seemingly ripening at the same time, I’m searching for ways to safely preserve my produce before it spoils.

Here are some useful safety tips and resources I’ve found helpful:

Home canning is an excellent way to preserve your garden produce, but if home canning is not done the proper way, your canned vegetables and fruits could cause botulism.

Botulism is a rare but potentially deadly illness caused by a poison most commonly produced by a germ called Clostridium botulinum. The germ is found in soil and can survive, grow, and produce a toxin in certain conditions, such as when food is improperly canned. The toxin can affect your nerves, paralyze you, and even cause death.

You cannot see, smell, or taste botulinum toxin—but taking even a small taste of food containing this toxin can be deadly.

Botulism is a medical emergency. If you or someone you know has symptoms of foodborne botulism, see your doctor or go to the emergency room immediately.

Symptoms may include the following:

• Double vision
• Blurred vision
• Drooping eyelids
• Slurred speech
• Difficulty swallowing
• A thick-feeling tongue
• Dry mouth
• Muscle weakness

Safe canning tips from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Many cases of foodborne botulism happen after people eat home-canned, preserved, or fermented foods that were contaminated with toxin. The foods became contaminated because they were not canned correctly.

1. Use proper canning techniques.

The best way to prevent foodborne botulism is by carefully following instructions for safe home canning in the USDA Complete Guide to Home Canning. 

Do not follow recipes and cookbooks that do not follow the steps in the USDA guide, even if you got these items from a trusted friend or family member.

You can learn more about proper home canning from these resources:

• The National Center for Home Food Preservation
• State and county extension services

2. Use the right equipment for the kind of foods that you are canning.

Pressure canning is the only recommended method for canning low-acid foods. Foods with low acid content are the most common sources of home-canning related botulism cases. Low-acids foods include almost every vegetable, some fruits, milk, all meats, fish, and seafood. See box to the right for examples. Do not use boiling water canners for low-acid foods because they will not protect against botulism.

What is low-acid food?

Low-acid foods have a pH level greater than 4.6, which means they are not acidic enough to prevent the growth of botulinum bacteria. Examples are:

• Asparagus
• Green beans
• Beets
• Corn
• Potatoes
• Some tomatoes
• Figs
• All meats
• Fish and seafood

Always use a properly sized pressure canner that meets USDA recommendations for pressure canning when canning low-acid foods. Contact your state or county extension service to find out if your pressure canner meets USDA recommendations.

3. When in doubt, throw it out.

If there is any doubt if safe canning guidelines have been followed, do not eat the food. Home-canned and store-bought food might be contaminated with toxin or other harmful germs if

• the container is leaking, bulging, or swollen;
• the container looks damaged, cracked, or abnormal;
• the container spurts liquid or foam when opened;
• the food is discolored, moldy, or smells bad.

If the container or the food inside has any signs of contamination, throw it out! If any of the food spills, wipe up the spill using a solution of 1/4 cup bleach for each 2 cups of water.

Never taste food to determine if it is safe. Do not taste or eat food that is discolored, moldy, or smells bad. Do not taste or eat food from cans that are leaking, have bulges or are swollen, or look damaged, cracked, or abnormal. Do not taste or eat food from a can that spurted liquid or foam when it was opened.

University Extensions

There are many universities that offer extension programs that teach community members about safe canning and food preservation. 

Utah State University’s Preserve the Harvest extension is one that I have found to be helpful. USU’s extension offers an online lecture series on preserving your garden harvest, as well as an online canning course. 

Other resources on the page include information and instruction on: 

• Selection, preparation, and pretreating of foods
• Canning
• Freezing
• Drying
• Food storage and packaging

Iowa State University is another institution offering free instructional courses on food preservation.

ISU’s Food Preservation 101 is a one-hour online course.  During which, nutrition and wellness specialists will:

• Discuss various food preservation techniques – pressure canning, hot water bath canning, dehydration and freezing.
• Provide science-based, reliable food preservation resources.
•  Answer general food preservation questions.

Food Preservation 101 will be hosted numerous dates and times between May and September.

For more information and to register, visit their website.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety Website, click here)

Speakers for the summit’s third of three sessions included:

• John Donaghy, Head of Food Safety, Nestle S.A.
• Michelle Danyluk, Professor, Food Science, University of Florida
• Ruth Petran, Senior Corporate Scientist, Food Safety & Public Health, Ecolab
• Sharon Brunelle, AOAC Technical Consultant
• Kalmia (Kali) E. Kniel, Professor, Microbial Food Safety, Department of Animal & Food Sciences, University of Delaware

Navigating COVID in the Food Supply Chain
John Donaghy, head of food safety for Nestle S.A. 

Donaghy presented “lessons from the land of lockdown” on how Nestle has dealt with the pandemic. Nestle is a global company with factories even in China, which put the company on the front line of dealing with and adapting to this pandemic. He explained that information about the coronavirus started as a trickle and turned into an avalanche of data. The company’s first priority was the health and safety of workers, followed by protecting business continuity.

A number of factors worked together to make producing enough food possible:

• Panic buying was increasing the demand for products.
• Shortage of workers to harvest and package food.
• License to operate changed and depended largely on the country the facility was located in.
  • Some countries insisted that workers with underlying conditions could not go to work.
  • Some countries said that Nestle’s food business was not essential work.

Challenges
Nestle has thousands of suppliers, many of which were not able to supply for periods during this pandemic. On site visits have had to stop amid travel restrictions and now Nestle has had to do off site audits.

“We had to reassure them about the safety of packaging,” Donaghy said. People who listened to the news were worried about where the packages came from, and if they could get sick from the contents.

“A piece of equipment doesn’t know a pandemic is going on,” Donaghy said, explaining how normal problems and breakdowns became bigger issues. Mechanics and experts on machines could not get to the places to fix things in person. This required things to be fixed through virtual instruction.

There was also a massive move to eCommerce. Nestle had to shift to new types of packaging and increase significantly the number of eCommerce products they were producing.

Other strategies and points of control for Nestle included everything from locker rooms to more buses.

Administrative and engineering solutions
Physical distancing: not just in the production area

• Transport
•  Check-ins
• Locker rooms,
• Canteens/breakout rooms
• Production lines

Added restrictions and distancing solutions

• More busses for distanced transportation
• PPE
• Dividers at work stations

Questions about how to proceed in the beginning
Donaghy talked about how face masks and whether or not to wear them became a big issue and evolving issue during the past few months. The availability of masks was questioned when the World Health Organization initially told the public not to wear masks to save them for healthcare workers. Other issues that arose were questions of where to procure masks, how to train/educate on wearing masks, whether masks needed to be disposed of, or could be reuse or washed.

Food Safety and COVID Employee Training
Michelle Danyluk, professor of food science, University of Florida
Danyluk provided information on how food workers’ food safety training has changed. The approach now includes a focus on viral pathogens, she said before listing other factors.

Risk of virus spread was focused on the fecal-oral route and now includes a respiratory route and person to person transmission.

Emphasis on hand hygiene/washing and personal hygiene now includes an emphasis on exposure risks outside the workplace.

Focus on cleaning and sanitizing must now add mask use as PPE.

Social distancing
It must be explained that 6 feet is not a magical number that the virus can’t move beyond, more distance is better, the professor said. Dunyluk explained that “these discussions are not easy for workers to have.”

Challenges with COVID Training
Danyluk, frankly, is concerned about a lack of concern. No direct emotional connection is also a negative factor in her opinion.

People think precautions infringe on rights or that the whole thing is fake, “just the flu” she said. Complicating the problems are a lack of hard science and vaccine reluctance. Understanding the bullet points of transmission is key for workers.

• Social distancing/remote training
• Pre/asymptomatic transmission
• Risk factors outside of the workplace

Agricultural workers have a reduced risk of transmission because they are outside, but there’s still risk. “Hard for them to understand the risk,” Danyluk explained. “They think (low-risk) means no risk.”

Danyluk emphasized the importance of employee trust, that workplaces must convince workers that they care if they get sick.

Mask challenges 

• How to wear them — they need to cover both the nose and mouth
• Hot and uncomfortable
• Disbelief about their efficacy

Lastly, Danyluk explained how these efforts can become more difficult with the spread of misinformation in media and social media.

Implementing an optimal hygiene program
Ruth Petran, senior corporate scientist for food safety and public health for Ecolab
Petran explained that an overall risk-based approach for COVID-19 management should include considerations for implementing an optimal hygiene program.

The challenge Petran presented is to answer the question — How can we optimally manage risks of a new illness agent that we are still learning about?

“The good news is that coronavirus is a small-enveloped virus. Enveloped viruses are the least resistant to disinfection, which means disinfectants can be used to effectively kill coronavirus on surfaces,” Petran said.

There can be confusion, however, about the differences between various procedures — Cleaning removes soil; sanitizing reduces the number of bacteria; disinfecting destroys bacteria and viruses; and we need to use disinfecting against Sars-CoV- 2.

Four steps

1. Pre-clean
2. Disinfect
3. Wait
4. Dry

Key Points

• Consider the relevant risks
• Sanitizers and disinfectants can help manage risks
• Choose the right product
• Use it properly, following the label
• Verify implementation of hygiene protocols

AOAC RI Emergency Response Validation for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 on Surfaces
Sharon Brunelle, AOAC technical consultant 

In Brunelle ‘s talk, she explained how AOAC Research Institute is working on validating commercial proprietary SARS-CoV-2 test kits for surfaces. More information on AOAC RI SARS-CoV-2 tests can be found on their website.

How might wastewater surveillance fit into the big picture of detection and control?
Kali Kniel, professor of  microbial food safety in the Department of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Delaware

Last in the IAFP Global Summit session, Kniel talked briefly about how wastewater surveillance is being used as a method of early coronavirus outbreak detection.

“Now it (wastewater surveillance) is being used to find an increase in SARS-CoV-2 in areas.”

Though this process is early in its development, Kniel thinks it has exciting potential to get ahead of the curb in dealing with the virus. “Why we still don’t know the best fit, it is a complementary tool for surveillance.”

The summit was partially sponsored by the Seattle law firm Marler Clark LLP. Founding partner Bill Marler is publisher of Food Safety Website.

(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety Website, click here)

“The specific mechanism for how it emerged in humans remains unknown,” say the authors.   “Nevertheless, a large body of virology, epidemiologic, veterinary and ecologic data establishes that the new virus, SARS-CoV-2, evolved directory or indirectly from a B-coronavirus in sarbecovirus (SARS-like virus) group that naturally infect bats and pangolins in Asia and Southeast Asia,” says the abstract.

“Scientists have warned for decades that such sarbecoviruses are poised to emerge, again and again, identified risk factors, and argued for enhanced pandemic prevention and control efforts. Unfortunately, few such preventive actions were taken resulting in the latest coronavirus emergence detected in late 2019 which quickly spread pandemically. The risk of similar coronavirus outbreaks in the future remains high. In addition to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic, we must undertake vigorous scientific, public health, and societal actions, including significantly increased funding for basic and applied research addressing disease emergence, to prevent this tragic history from repeating itself,” it continues.

The first SARS outbreak in 2002-04 was also deadly but also disappeared fairly quickly and the new Journal article says a 2007 warning from scientists who studied what happened went largely unheeded. Like COVID-19, the first SARS outbreak was known for causing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus. SARS was first identified in Foshan, Guangdong, China, in November 2002.   It infected more than 8,000 people in 29 different countries and territories, causing at least 774 deaths. The World Health Organization declared the first SARS pandemic on July 5, 2003, with the last cases reported in 2004.

In 2007, scientists who studied the first SARS pandemic said there was a large reservoir of SARS-CoV-like viruses in horseshoe bats that was like a time bomb. “The possibility of the re-emergence  of SARS and other novel viruses, … should not be ignored,” they warned.

Scientists from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH), and the Boston University School of Medicine are among the authors, who call in the article for “vigorous scientific, public health, and societal actions, including significantly increased funding for basic and applied research addressing disease emergence, to prevent this tragic history from repeating itself.”  Among the authors are:

• David Morens, a senior advisor to the director of NIAID. He is also currently chairman of the American Committee on Arthropod-Borne Viruses at ASTMH
• Joel Breman, current president of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH)
• Gerald Keusch, Associate Director of the National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory Institute at Boston University and Associate Professor at the School of Medicine; former director of the Fogarty International Center at NIH

The next step in the processes is for the public to submit comments to the departments on the Scientific Report.

The lengthy report completes the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee’s work, which ran from March 12, 2019, through June 10, 2020.  The report provides the USDA and HHS Secretaries with advice as they formulate the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

Two major themes are contained in the advisory committee’s submission. These are:

The importance of considering life stage in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans

• These life stages include pregnancy, lactation, birth to age 24 months, childhood,  adolescence, and adulthood.
• Special nutrition considerations exist at each life stage and improvements in recommended food patterns at each stage have the potential to influence healthy food choices at the next life stage.

Dietary patterns provide a framework for the Dietary Guidelines for Americans within and across life stages

• Healthy dietary patterns are defined by the quality of foods that are included, as well as foods that should be limited.
• A high-quality dietary pattern can promote health, achieve nutrient adequacy and energy balance, and reduce the risk of diet-related chronic diseases.
• The evidence on specific dietary components such as beverages, seafood, added sugars, dietary fats, macronutrient profile, consistently supports the importance of foods consumed in healthy dietary patterns as a framework for the guidelines.

The sheer size of the document is a challenge even for those who are involved in the dietary guidelines process. “We’re combing through these final recommendations—all 845 pages of them!— with an eye towards Big Food and Big Soda’s influence,” said Lena Greenberg with  Boston-based Corporate Accountability, a non-governmental organization.

The Union of Concerned Scientists, which is also involved with the process that is expected to produce new Dietary Guidelines for Americans by the end of this year,  said a “major development” is that the advisory committee has considered the “context of the food environment and the overall food system,” including such topics as the sustainability of the food supply and food insecurity as experienced by many Americans.

“The advisory committee has recognized what a growing number of studies have found: that what we eat every day has profound consequences for the environment and our future food supply. The USDA and HHS need to take this seriously. If they don’t, the diet they recommend today will put a healthy diet further out of reach tomorrow,” said Sarah Reinhardt, the lead analyst for food systems and health at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

USDA and HHS will consider the Advisory Committee’s Scientific Report, along with public and agency comments, as the federal departments develop the next edition of the dietary guidelines.

To ensure the scientific foundation of the dietary guidelines, the emphasis is placed on comments with a scientific justification, not the number of comments for or against a topic or conclusion. The departments ensure that the dietary guidelines are based on the totality of the scientific evidence and not on individual studies or opinions. Public and agency comments also can help the dietary guidelines writers understand how terminology is interpreted by others and identify terms or points that require additional consideration to achieve plain language goals.

As part of this public comment period, on Aug. 11 the USDA and HHS are scheduled to have a public meeting to hear oral comments from the public on the Scientific Report. Registration to present oral comments will be announced on the attend a meeting page closer to the meeting date.

Comments can be provided electronically — preferred by the government — or through the postal mail.

All comments submitted to the Docket FNS-2020-0015 on Regulations.gov are processed before posting. Please allow three business days for your comment to be posted. Please do not submit your comment more than once.

• To submit an electronic comment visit the page on Regulations.gov. Instructions for submitting comments are available on that website. Do not include personally identifiable information, such as your phone number or street address, in the text of your comment.
• Comments can be mailed to Kristin Koegel, USDA Food and Nutrition Service, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion; 1320 Braddock Place, Room 4094; Alexandria, VA 22314.

When Saul Sanchez, a 78-year old “green hat” supervisor at the JBS beef plant in Greeley, CO, died from COVID-19 this past  April 7, nobody was thinking he might be the first of nearly 100 others in the industry to succumb to the virus. Sanchez worked at the Greeley beef plant for more than 30 years and he reported for work early in the pandemic and was among those who paid the ultimate price.

The Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) is now out with the human cost of keeping meat and poultry plants running this past spring and into the summer months as COVID-19 drags on. Market disruptions and reduced production did occur, but the feared nationwide meat shortages did not.

When infections create fear and when COVID-19 deaths leave behind incredible sadness, some 525,000 meat and poultry industry employees showed up for shift after shift so American consumers never came up short of bacon or sirloins. Those 525,000 industry professionals keep about 3,500 facilities up and running nationwide, according to MMWR.

“Essential jobs” during the pandemic have included  “good news” and “bad news” elements. The good news was that unlike someone in a non-essential job,  there was an option of going to work every day.   Bad news is some of the “essential” jobs included significant risks.

The MMWR has provided the first comprehensive report on just how risky it was for meat and poultry industry employees who kept things running. Overall, 239 facilities in 28 states reported 16,233 COVID-19 cases and 86 COVID-19–related deaths among workers, as of the writing of the report. Demographic characteristics reported by 21 states show Hispanics bore the brunt of the meat industry’s COVID-19 illnesses.  And the MMWR data suggests a disproportionate burden.

“Among animal slaughtering and processing workers from the 21 states included in this report whose race/ethnicity was known, approximately 39 percent were white, 30 percent were Hispanic, 25 percent were black, and 6 percent were Asian,” according to MMWR. “However, among 9,919 workers with COVID-19 with race/ethnicity reported, approximately 56 percent  were Hispanic, 19 percent  were black, 13 percent were white, and 12 percent  were Asian, suggesting that Hispanic and Asian workers might be disproportionately affected by COVID-19 in this workplace setting.”

The MMWR says meat and poultry processing facilities “face distinctive challenges in the control of infectious diseases, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1). COVID-19 outbreaks among meat and poultry processing facility workers can rapidly affect large numbers of persons.”    The report documents the evolution of COVID-19’s strike on the industry.

•  Assessment of COVID-19 cases among workers in 115 meat and poultry processing facilities through April 27, 2020, documented 4,913 cases and 20 deaths reported by 19 states. 
• The report provides updated aggregate data from states regarding the number of meat and poultry processing facilities affected by COVID-19, the number and demographic characteristics of affected workers, and the number of COVID-19–associated deaths among workers, as well as descriptions of interventions and prevention efforts at these facilities.
• Aggregate data on confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths among workers identified and reported through May 31, 2020, were obtained from 239 affected facilities (those with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case in one or more workers) in 23 states.* COVID-19 was confirmed in 16,233 workers, including 86 COVID-19–related deaths. 
• Among 14 states reporting the total number of workers in affected meat and poultry processing facilities (112,616), COVID-19 was diagnosed in 9.1 percent of workers. Among 9,919 (61 percent) cases in 21 states with reported race/ethnicity, 87 percent occurred among racial and ethnic minority workers. 

This is important work because until this MMWR report came out unions and other non-government organizations were the only sources for information on the COVID-19’s impact on the meat and poultry industries.  When a number of meat and poultry plants around the country became “hot spots,” and emotions ran high, the unions and NGOs were often the only sources of numbers. And some alleged people were being “forced” to work in the industry.  That is not really accurate of course and takes away from the gallantry of employees who volunteer to take these risks.

The MMWR found “commonly reported interventions and prevention efforts” at the facilities included:

• implementing worker temperature or symptom screening and COVID-19 education, 
• mandating face coverings, 
• adding hand hygiene stations, 
• and adding physical barriers between workers. 

Targeted workplace interventions and prevention efforts that are appropriately tailored to the groups most affected by COVID-19 are critical to reducing both COVID-19–associated occupational risk and health disparities among vulnerable populations. Implementation of these interventions and prevention efforts across meat and poultry processing facilities nationally could help protect workers in this critical infrastructure industry.

The MMWR said states reported COVID-19 cases determined by the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists confirmed case definition.